Fwd: Re: Application duplication (was: Re: cdbakeoven)

[Waldo Bastian]

On Saturday 20 April 2002 07:27 am, Thomas Zander wrote:
> IMO all applications in the KDE CVS (and being released) should follow at
> least the styleguide or should not be released with the
> KDE-stamp-of-approval.

They should indeed.

> In KDE we have a standard to keep up, for the plain and simple reason that
> if the basic release is not up-to-par the people using it and the people
> programming for KDE will say 'but you did not follow the styleguide either;
> so why should I' and similar.

The answer involves "users" but I disgress.

> Asking a project to join the KDE CVS is an honor since you _will_ attract
> more public, you _will_ attract more programmers etc.  That is; unless
> there are no boundraries to the entry of KDE. The admission of similar
> applications that are of quite different quality totally nullifies the
> effect, or should I say, the honor of admission.

Having an application in KDE has nothing to do with honor. There are real 
benefits of having an application in KDE as well as drawbacks (ask Mosfet) I 
think the benefits usually outweigh the drawbacks and for that reason 
applications are better off in KDE cvs.

> You always make a bet when you add accept a thirth party in your community;
> but most of the time it works out OK.  Starting to work with 3 of them at
> the same time can not be seen as cooporation anymore; you just created a
> competition. I don't like that and I really would like the best to become a
> standard in the KDE releases, but make a choice (bet) now, don't let the
> projects fight and let one down at the end.

In the case of the CD burners people don't _start_ to work on 3. They started 
long ago. Each and everyone of those applications should prove that they have 
the quality necassery for a release and the fact that there are 3 of them 
makes it easier to be very critical in that regard.

Cheers,
Waldo
-- 
bastian at kde.org  |   SuSE Labs KDE Developer  |  bastian at suse.com